YUK! A face full of chemicals!

Mike Gayler wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

I'm not given to getting apoplectic these days, but the driver with the badly adjusted windscreen
washer caused me to blow a fuse this morning!

Happened to me a couple of years ago and the driver must have had some very strong detergent in the
wash, as I had very stinging eyes after getting sprayed.

Fortunately I was on my motorbike at the time, caught the driver up and the next junction and
'politely' explained what problems he had caused me, (and possibly others), and he was very
apologetic. In fact he stopped and got out of the car and readjusted the jets with a pin or
something that his wife found in her handbag.

All's well ..... :~)

Mike Gayler said:

I'm not given to getting apoplectic these days, but the driver with the badly adjusted windscreen
washer caused me to blow a fuse this morning! It wasn't just a fine spray of water it was a good
dollop of windscreen wash smelling gloop! Has anyone else experienced this?

Mike - Leicester

Yup. An AA van did this to me in circumstances I could only interpret as deliberate. I even
considered going to the police onb the basis that squirting nasty chemicals in someone's eyes *must*
constitue assault.

In article <[email hidden]>, one of infinite monkeys

at the keyboard of Mike Gayler said:

(chop)

I was once on the other end of this. I was in Italy and driving a recently- adjusted car. Trying to
clean the windscreen, I was hailed by a moped rider who had just got an unexpected shower while
coming up on my left.

I apologised, and she said no problem. Fortunately it was water rather than muck, and a shower is,
on the whole, welcome in the Italian summer.

Of course, having cycled a lot more than I've driven in my life, I've also experienced getting
showered on the bike.

--
Hutton: Nobody is asking why Blair was so keen to have a damaging inquiry into a minor side-issue of
going to war.

So, what has he successfully deflected media attention from?

Mike Gayler said:

I'm not given to getting apoplectic these days, but the driver with the badly adjusted windscreen
washer caused me to blow a fuse this morning! It wasn't just a fine spray of water it was a good
dollop of windscreen wash smelling gloop! Has anyone else experienced this?

Mike - Leicester

Yup, a couple of times over the last few years. I had a good shout at the last one.
--
Mark

After thinking long about a signature I've decided not to bother.

Not Responding said:

Mike Gayler said:

I'm not given to getting apoplectic these days, but the driver with the badly adjusted windscreen
washer caused me to blow a fuse this morning! It wasn't just a fine spray of water it was a good
dollop of windscreen wash smelling gloop! Has anyone else experienced this?

Mike - Leicester

Yup. An AA van did this to me in circumstances I could only interpret as deliberate. I even
considered going to the police onb the basis that squirting nasty chemicals in someone's eyes
*must* constitue assault.

A blue hatchback did this to my girlfriend (50 yards behind me) then swerved close in order to spray
me too. No action as when your eyes are full of soap it's hard to read number plates. Let's hope it
doesn't catch on.

Kit

Mike Gayler <[email hidden]> wrote: ( I'm not given to getting apoplectic these days,
but the driver with the ) badly adjusted windscreen washer caused me to blow a fuse this morning! It
( wasn't just a fine spray of water it was a good dollop of windscreen wash ) smelling gloop! ( Has
anyone else experienced this?

Sometimes there isn't a "well adjusted" adjustment for washscreen winders. Sometimes the
aerodynamics of the pre-shattered road debris at the front of the mdg are against you. The Cavalier
was notorious for this: they either had the water jets going over the roof at low speed, or coming
in through the side windows and drenching the driver at high speeds, with nothing in between.

Cars would be much better for everyone concerned, except perhaps their occupants, if windscreens
were banned.

"Geraint Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Sometimes there isn't a "well adjusted" adjustment for washscreen winders.

As a public service I offer the following:

<chapmancentral.demon.co.ukVolvo Washer JetOpen ↗
s>

I fully acknowledge that this is Incredibly Sad :-)

--
Guy
===

WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
chapmancentral.demon.co.ukchapmancentral.demon.co.ukOpen ↗

As a public service /I/ offer the following:
chapmancentral.demon.co.ukVolvo Washer JetsOpen ↗

With a "s" on the end :-)

--

Dave Larrington - legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uklegslarry.beerdrinkers.co.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
bhpc.org.ukbhpc.org.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================

Dave Larrington said:

As a public service /I/ offer the following:
<http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk/Web/public.nsf/documents/Volvo_Washer_Jets>

With a "s" on the end :-)

[censored] Outlook wraps URL despite angle brackets shock. Redmond, WA, based vendor of [censored] software
implicated.

Note the fluency with which my website directed you to the right page though, Dave. Oh, and I've now
aliased it. Even sadder :-)

Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
chapmancentral.demon.co.ukchapmancentral.demon.co.ukOpen ↗

Just zis Guy said:

Dave Larrington said:

As a public service /I/ offer the following:
<http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk/Web/public.nsf/documents/Volvo_Washer_Jets>

With a "s" on the end :-)

[censored] Outlook wraps URL despite angle brackets shock. Redmond, WA, based vendor of [censored] software
implicated.

Note that the correct syntax for embedding a URL in plain text, for example an email or an internet
post, is a left angle bracket, followed by 'URL', followed by a colon, followed by the fully
qualified url, followed by a right angle bracket. See RFC 1738.

You can't really blame Microsoft if you get it wrong. The fact that Microsoft would have got it
wrong even if you had got it right, is, of course, incidental to this discussion.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) jasmine.org.uk~simonOpen ↗

Hobbit ringleader gives Sauron One in the Eye.

Simon Brooke said:

Note that the correct syntax for embedding a URL in plain text, for example an email or an
internet post, is a left angle bracket, followed by 'URL', followed by a colon, followed by the
fully qualified url, followed by a right angle bracket. See RFC 1738.

And I'm supposed to know this /how/ precisely?

--

Dave Larrington - legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uklegslarry.beerdrinkers.co.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
bhpc.org.ukbhpc.org.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================

Dave Larrington said:

Simon Brooke said:

Note that the correct syntax for embedding a URL in plain text, for example an email or an
internet post, is a left angle bracket, followed by 'URL', followed by a colon, followed by the
fully qualified url, followed by a right angle bracket. See RFC 1738.

And I'm supposed to know this /how/ precisely?

RTFM

Tony

Dave Larrington said:

Simon Brooke said:

Note that the correct syntax for embedding a URL in plain text, for example an email or an
internet post, is a left angle bracket, followed by 'URL', followed by a colon, followed by the
fully qualified url, followed by a right angle bracket. See RFC 1738.

And I'm supposed to know this /how/ precisely?

If you use the Internet, you are presumed to be familiar with the RFCs, just as if you use the roads
you are presumed to be familiar with the Highway Code. How else are you supposed to know how to use
it properly? See <URL: ietf.orgoverview.htmlOpen ↗ > or <URL: ietf.orgtao.htmlOpen ↗ >.

Of course it has to be admitted that most RFCs are dry, technical, and of real interest only to
geeks, and that someone ought to write a beginners guide to the Internet; perhaps there is one which
is worth having, but if so I don't know of it.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) jasmine.org.uk~simonOpen ↗

IMHO, there aren't enough committed Christians, but that's care in the community for you.
-- Ben Evans

Simon Brooke said:

If you use the Internet, you are presumed to be familiar with the RFCs

A highly dubious statement, if I may say so.

--

Dave Larrington - legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uklegslarry.beerdrinkers.co.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
bhpc.org.ukbhpc.org.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================

Simon Brooke said:

If you use the Internet, you are presumed to be familiar with the RFCs, just as if you use the
roads you are presumed to be familiar with the Highway Code. How else are you supposed to know how
to use it properly? See <URL: ietf.orgoverview.htmlOpen ↗ > or <URL:
ietf.orgtao.htmlOpen ↗ >.

Don't talk such elitist bollocks. There has never been any such presumption for users. The RFCs
are more akin to the RTA etc, not the HC. OTOH the writers of the software which they use should
know it all.

clive

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:05:05 GMT, Simon Brooke <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

If you use the Internet, you are presumed to be familiar with the RFCs

Yeah, right. But maybe the programmers should be.

Thoughts:

1. Angle bracket notation without URL: appears to work in everything except Outhouse
2. Angle bracket notation with URL: appears to fail in Outhouse
3. Adding URL: merely means that more URL's are broken by Outhouse due to hitting the wrap limit ;-)

Proposed conclusion: Outhouse is [censored].

All those for the motion?

Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
chapmancentral.demon.co.ukchapmancentral.demon.co.ukOpen ↗

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:05:05 GMT, in
<[email hidden]>, Simon Brooke

Quoted message said:

Dave Larrington said:

Simon Brooke said:

Note that the correct syntax for embedding a URL in plain text, for example an email or an
internet post, is a left angle bracket, followed by 'URL', followed by a colon, followed by the
fully qualified url, followed by a right angle bracket. See RFC 1738.

And I'm supposed to know this /how/ precisely?

If you use the Internet, you are presumed to be familiar with the RFCs, just as if you use the
roads you are presumed to be familiar with the Highway Code. How else are you supposed to know how
to use it properly? See <URL: ietf.orgoverview.htmlOpen ↗ > or <URL:
ietf.orgtao.htmlOpen ↗ >.

<chetongueek> You bloody computer spods NEVER stop at traffic lights and you always program at night
without lights. You should be forced to use the green 3ft strip at the side of the bandwidth.
</chetongueek>

Love and daft analogies from Rich x

--
I remember when the internet was only in black & white. It only had a few pages but at least they
all worked. Email: Put only the word "richard" before the @ sign.

Just zis Guy said:

Simon Brooke said:

If you use the Internet, you are presumed to be familiar with the RFCs

Yeah, right. But maybe the programmers should be.

Thoughts:

1. Angle bracket notation without URL: appears to work in everything except Outhouse
2. Angle bracket notation with URL: appears to fail in Outhouse
3. Adding URL: merely means that more URL's are broken by Outhouse due to hitting the wrap
limit ;-)

Proposed conclusion: Outhouse is [censored].

All those for the motion?

Oh, no question.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) jasmine.org.uk~simonOpen ↗

IMHO, there aren't enough committed Christians, but that's care in the community for you.
-- Ben Evans